32 
resting. But let me begin by quoting a passage from Professor Max Muller, 
and I think it will fully bear out -what Mr. Keddie has so well set forth m this 
paper; namely, that man in his primeval state, totally apart from material 
civilization, had that which was mentally and morally to be called true 
civilization. Max MiiUer says | / J 
“ More and more tlie image of man, in whatever clime we meet him, rises 
before us noble and pure torn the very beginning As far as we can trace 
back the footsteps of man, even on the lowest strata , of '“ s ^ 3 r ’ d h * 
the Divine gift of a sound humanity emerging slowly from the depths 
animal brutality can never be maintained again. 
That is the opinion of Professor Max Miiller, no mean authority, especially 
in the department of which he is pre-eminently a master. The paper whic 
we have had the pleasure of hearing most properly distinguishes between 
moral and material civilization, and I fully concur with Mr. Keddie in saying 
that that is the exact point at which Sir John Lubbock makes the radical 
mistake of his argument. And it is a mistake which is umversaUy made on 
this interesting and important topic. Civilization is taken in some fictitious 
sense to be necessarily tied up with the later centuries of the world s history, 
and with those advances in the Arts and in the habits of life which are more 
or less identified with the word in our ordinary language. Civilization, as 
Mr Eeddie has shown, is sufficiently subserved if the being that possesses 1 
is intelligent, clean, moral, honest, and honourable, even though he may 
have but little of the material elements of human progress about him 
The question is whether, with such a starting-point of mental and moral 
civilization as we now predicate, a platform is not provided for man from 
which he necessarily evolves material civilization ;-whether he, being 
originally not savage, but mentally and morally civilized l was in a ^ state 
from which material civilization might be evolved. With regard to S 
John Lubbock’s remarks as to the existence of a stone age antecedent to 
the metal age, I would say that that is not only consistent with the declara- 
tions of the Word of God, but it is not in itself in the least degree a proof 
that such a condition indicated a want of civilization, or even of material 
civilization. There is a remarkable passage in the book of Joshua whic 
indicates the co-existence of civilization with a stone age. Joshua was told, 
“ Make ye sharp knives,” and in the margin we have ‘ knives of flints , 
from which you see that there was a stone age existing with a metal age, and 
the existence of a stone age really is no proof that there was not m some 
sense a metal age remote or near. But putting that aside, I would point out 
that Sir John Lubbock may be right in saying that all Archeological and 
Ethical Science shows that the human race has greatly progressed from that 
state called the stone age, and yet, for all that, the stone age might not have 
been an uncivilized age. What have we in Scripture 1 X will not quote the 
words, but there were seven generations between Adam and the man w 10 
first invented metals. First there was Adam, then Cain, then Enoch, then 
Irad, then Mehujael, then Methusael, then Lamech, and then Tubal-cain. 
There were, therefore, seven distinct generations, which would give you more 
